Mass Update

Ready to be published as GFD-E.057

Thanks to the authors/editors for effort on this document!

Added Markus back to author's list. Corrected his contact address

On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 03:08:02PM -0800, Mary Thompson wrote:
> Greg,
>    Somehow Markus Lorch's name was removed from the Author's list
> between the last version I submitted and the GFD-E.57 version. Looks
> like when the information was moved from the 1st page to a header.
>
> Since this got his attention :-), I now have a current contact address
> for him (lorchm@acm.org) which should replace his virgina tech address
> in the contacts section.
>
> Also there were some comments submitted by Olle last week that I have
> still not had a chance to look at.
>
> Mary

I'm cc'ing Joel: let's *not* publish this yet.  Seems there
are a few remaining issues.

Mary: would you please go ahead and download the document
marked gfd-e.057 and update it with the needed author name?

It's here:
  https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/index.php?aid=1485

Then/also, review the public comments here:
  https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=553

Your message to me on November 28 indicated you had already
reviewed the comments (it's part of what was requested
in the tracker link), so I'm surprised to hear this
had not been done.  Please take as long as you need, and
perform any needed revisions to the document.  As long
as any revisions are minor, we'll be able to move straight
ahead with publication.  (If they are major, we might
look for another period of public comment.)

Please let me know if anything is unclear.  Thanks for
your ongoing efforts for this document.
  -- Greg

This will be published as GFD-E.057.  Thanks to the
authors/editors for work on this document!

The GFSG had a discussion about this document
on October 25.  Because OGSI has been largely
superseded by OGSA, this seems to be better
classified as an Experimental status document, 
rather than Recommendation.

According to the area directors, this has been discussed
with the authors already.  

Mary & other authors: would you please signify
your agreement with this reclassification, by uploading
a slightly changed documetn with the new running
title?   Or, if there is further discussion, please enter
it in the tracker or send me some email.

Unless there are impediments or further discussion,
we will go ahead and publish this as a GFD-E.  Thanks!

We didn't get to talk about this on October 18,
so it will be scheduled for the next available GGF
telecon.

I'm attaching a document from Hiro with suggested
edits.

GFSG approved moving document to 60-day public comment period on 19, July 2005.

The GFSG has discussed this document and will take one
more week to discuss it.  Sorry for the delay.

Thanks for this submission.  I have applied some very small
edits (just spacing and formatting; no words), and also 
used MS Word to "accept edits."  I also removed the cover
page and tweaked the running header.

The next phase for this document is a 15-day GFSG review.
I will aim to have this accomplished during the July 12 GFSG
conferenced call.  The next phase, after any GFSG concerns
are addressed, will be 60-day public comment.

I support the publication of this document, but feel it could be improved in light of the recent developments in OGSA, namely the development of 
Profiles. This document is, in essence, a profile and could be substantially better if it followed the guidelines set out in the "OGSA Profile 
Definition" document. [Note: As this document was being developed contemporaneously with the profile definition, the authors are unlike to have been 
aware of it.] Reworking this document to follow this pattern would both improve its overall quality as well as add weight to its impact as a normative
 part of OGSA. 

I would suggest that this document get published in its current form as a "Proposed Recommendation" with the expectation that before it is turned into
 a "Recommendation" it be converted to a Profile and the OGSA interaction processes implied by this implemented.

Nits:

Page 2 & 15: Page 2 copyright date is quite old and page 15 date is missing. - I said these were nits!

Page 4: On page 4, the authors "recommend" not using 'negative attributes". I think this statement should be much stronger, e.g. MUST NOT.

Page 6 & 7: Formating (type style) problems in the descriptions of elements.

Page 11: Tome elements MUST be in GMT. The only way to talk about time is in absolute terms. Other attributes need to be added to cover use cases 
related to local time at the server, e.g. VO-X can only use me during the local night.

By default, new documents evidently are still assigned to Charlie. I have reassigned this to Greg.